The INEE website has moved to You are currently viewing the static archive of the former INEE website, established in May 2019.

Promoting access to quality, safe, and relevant education for all persons affected by crisis

Global Consultation on EiE (14-26 May 2015)

Add your voice to the global conversation!

Between 14-26 May 2015, all interested parties are invited to participate in an important consultation about how to better support and finance education in emergencies.

Join in by leaving your comments below.

Consultation background

The Overseas Development Institute (ODI) has drafted an issues paper on education in emergencies that will influence the Oslo Summit on Education for Development discussions on 6-7 July. The paper outlines the challenge of education in emergencies and protracted crises, explores the current emergency response system, and poses key questions to inform a range of possible solutions that will be proposed as part of the final paper. In particular, the paper includes an outline of a proposal to create a ‘common’ or ‘bridging’ platform for education and crises, which would identify and act to address blockages in aid architecture that cut across both global and country levels.  This would include to:

  • Work across humanitarian and development actors and contexts
  • Agree and operate under a common set of principles
  • Establish a global fund or finance facility for education in crises
  • Set out a common approach to needs assessment and education planning
  • Include a data collection and analysis arm
  • Implement some of the above approaches initially in a small number of crisis contexts
  • Take forward advocacy and governance through a ‘high level panel’ or ‘champion’s group’

As there are many questions about how such an education and crises ‘platform’ might work, we urge you to review the ODI paper and respond to the following questions in this discussion forum. For clarity, please reference the question(s) you are responding to at the outset of your submission. Feel free to leave as many comments as you like and to respond directly to the comments of others.

Discussion questions


The Challenge - There are a large number of ‘challenges’, involving different issues depending on type, phase and scale of a crisis, as well as impacts ranging from children out of school long-term, shorter-term but extended disruption, poor quality of teaching-learning, harm to the teaching force, and damage to school infrastructure.  Moreover, there are significant gaps in funding available and economic impacts of failing to support education in crisis contexts.

Question 1:  What challenge, or aspect thereof, needs the most attention by high level political actors at the Oslo Summit and beyond?

Architecture - The aid and response architecture for education in emergencies is not fit for purpose. There are issues surround the humanitarian and development divide, unclear implementation of mandates in cross-border crises, at times a lack of capable partners for delivery, gaps in terms of assessment and planning, limited data collection and analysis, and often, a shortage of funds to fully address education needs.

Question 2:  What are the top 2-3 issues in terms of response architecture that should be addressed in order to better ensure quality education is available to all children and youth in crises?

Solutions - A number of solutions are being discussed to bridge some of the gaps in terms of humanitarian and development architecture.

Question 3:  Would a set of principles agreed at a high political level make a difference?  How could they be used to hold governments, UN agencies and other partners to account?

Question 4:  What will it take to guarantee that additional funds are in place to support education and crisis?  Is a global fund or financing mechanism for education and crises a good idea? If so, how should it be organized and used?

  1. In what types of crises?
  2. Over what kind of timeframe?
  3. Who leads request (organization, coordination group, etc.)?
  4. Who is eligible to receive funds?
  5. Who should be involved in (i) in-country and (ii) global governance?
  6. How would a new fund interact with existing architecture?
  7. Other suggestions

Question 5:  How might we better improve the functioning and capacity of current architecture, as described above, in other ways?  What key changes could:

  1. Link humanitarian and development coordination
  2. Lead to better response in regional crises, in particular for refugees
  3. Increase number of capable partners for delivery
  4. Improve needs assessment
  5. Advance recovery and transition planning and costing
  6. Strengthen information management / monitoring and reporting
  7. Further address the issues you raised in question 2 or 3 above


For more information about this consultation, visit the Global Consultation webpage.

For questions, please contact [email protected].